[BAP2] What Polio Vaccine Injury Looks Like, Decades Later

Many studies have shown, with respect to polio, measles and others, that the malady had pretty much completely run its course by the time the vaccine was rolled out. With respect to measles, the pharmaceutical companies took credit for nearly eradicating measles, but it had already been reduced to almost zero. Further studies have shown that all the vaccine does is provide temporary immunity, thus increasing the age of first infection for many people. Measles is safest to experience as a child. The older you get the more vulnerable. The measles vaccine has actually made things worse. Also, there are plenty of examples of modern measles outbreaks in communities with extremely high vaccination rates, e.g. 98%, including in many vaccinated individuals. It simply doesn't work; it makes things worse. But pharma has immunity from liability and it is highly profitable, so . . .

With polio, infections INCREASED dramatically when the vaccine was rolled out. That was the point of the article. And there is NO proof that is provides any real immunity at all. In other words, the vaccine only increases risk; it does not decrease any risk.
Don't believe me. Do the research.


I think people who refuse to get vaccinated are asking the wrong question.

They dwell on the fact that some people have adverse reaction to vaccines, some even come down with the malady they were being vaccinated against. Almost all medications are toxic to some people.

The proper question to ask here is whether your chances of getting serious ill are less if you are vaccinated than if you are not. I am old enough to remember when polio was a serious childhood illness. Every year thousands died or were paralyzed for life. Some young people had to spend the rest of their lives in an iron lung because their diaphragm muscles were paralyzed. This is now a thing of the past. But I am sure this is small consolation to those who do suffer bad effects from the polio vaccine.

There are no risk free medications. I take daily five meds. Two of them come with warnings that some people experience serious or even life threatening complications from the meds. The question is NEVER whether a medication or a procedure has any risks. There are no risk free meds or procedures.

The question people ought to ask is whether the risk of getting serious ill is greater if you do not get vaccinated versus if you do get vaccinated.

This is not the same question of whether the government should force people to get vaccinated. My answer if they (the unvaccinated) expect someone else (either an insurance company or a public health plan) to cover the costs of their illness, then that someone else has a right to demand that they be vaccinated. In other words if you don’t want to be vaccinated against polio or any other malady and you later come down with the malady, YOU ARE ON YOUR OWN.

Les Mangus

I am unimpressed with any of this “evidence”.

There certainly were lots of problems with polio vaccines when they first came out. This is true of all medical progress. When first introduced heart transplants extended lives only a matter of weeks or days. The procedure has gotten better and now transplants can expect many year of useful life.

We should NOT be swayed by studies that were done back in the 50s and 60s. Vaccines like all other medical procedures has gotten better over the years.

Nor should we be swayed by anecdotes about individuals who suffered bad consequences of vaccines. Their experience has to be compared to the many thousands who were crippled by polio prior to the introduction of vaccines. Some young people spent their entire lives in lying on their backs in iron lungs because polio had crippled their diaphragms and they could not breathe on their own. Perhaps the dread that polio inspired in people before the advent of vaccines explains some of the haste to get something done even if it wasn’t perfect.